The Sun. — London, England, 1818-02-20 00:00:00

PARLIAMENT. 110UE OF LORDS, THURSDAY, FEB• 19• The Malt Mit 1 , 4 Bill passed through a Com- Mit Ice, and was it:putted without amendment. FINANCE. The !louse havin; resolved itself into a Com• mittee on the 30,000,0001. Exchequer Bills Bill, Earl GRoSYFINfort thought it a fit opportunity to sav - a feur words upon the Financial State of the Country. lie regretted that tconomy hail not been rerommended in the Speech delivered by the L!Prds Gnitmissioners at the opening of the Session, and slid more that economy had not been practi cally carried into etiect. It was indeed a lamentable consideration, that at the present moment, atter three years of peace, the revenue of the country was Many Milli Ons short of the expenditure, and there St emedno prospect of making those economi cal rednctionk'ethich such a stare of „affairs impe riously called titr. I instead of this, we had an.army on toot of neat lyloo,ooo men, for what purpOse he kneivN not .; and we bad to Maintain a force in France,.for the purpose of keeping the Bourbons on tine throne.- He trusted, that but a short time would elapse before the troops in Fr a tic e would be withdrawn, it being in vain to think of s ,• i s-, t any GovernMent by slid., means. What..., ever might be the state of parties in France, wire liter Ultras or lutras, or whatever they might choose to ,call their pArties—whatever squabbk% migh# arise amongst themselves, he mlintained •thaf we - ot►ght to leave them to settle their own disputes, anti not burden ourselves with any ex petibe on account of them. Above all things it se a.t most essential that the strictest economy should be practised in every deprtment of the Giverumeilt, anti he could not learn that the dictates of economy wete at all attended to, or at least in any way that could have the desired effect. The Earl of LtvEnroot. did not think it neces sary to follow the Noble Lord in the topics he had introduced, or to discuss now any question regaiding the Bourbons. The proper time for a discussion would be when the papers up on the su bject were all before the House, and he should then be ready to enter into the invest4,,a tion. Where the Noble Earl got the information that the expenditure of the country was many millions beyond the revenue, he (Lora Liverpool) was at a hos to guess, certain he was, that there was no paper or document bofore the House that could bear out the Noble Earl in any such con clusion. With regard to economy, the Noble Earl was equally mistaken, the•tact being, that all the suggestions for reductions in the public expen diture wade by the Committee ot Finance had been adopted and acted upon, or that where they hail not, he was fully prepared, when the discus sion came on, to assign sufficient reasons for any exception in which tliey had been departed front. The iutormation of the. Noble Earl with respeCt to our army in France - was of an equally strange character Witt) other it,formation which lie appear ed to have - oht?jned ; ,the - fact was, that 'if our troops in Fiance were ordered borne, and actually iii,batided, it would make no difference whatever in our ex;•eutihne. The Earl of LAUDERDALE wished to know, with refer ence to what the Noble Earl bad just - stated, whether th&Ex penditure of the country did nut, very-considerably exceed the actual Revenue The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, that depended Nom the - view which was taken of the subject. Taking the whole. Re venue of the country, including the Sii:kiog Fund, it Would undoubtedly exceed all tbe-Expenditme. - Lord KING maintained, that, in that, case, the Sinking run d was merely nominal, and that no part of the debt was actually discharged by it, there being no excess of Revenue o'er the Espeartiture. The Earl of LIVERPOOL denied this conclusion, con tending, that, including the Sinking , fund, there was an actual eXcess of Revenue over Expenditure, and that to 'the amaunt of that excess ' upwards of 44000,0001. there was an actual diminution of the aggregate amount of d e bt. The Earl (:ItOWENOR. said, he had conceived that the Army in France caused an increase of expenditure to this country, and that Os being withdraws would he a material .sating [the Earl of Liccroool said across the Table, Not a shilling].—He had, however, considered it his duty to bring the subject under the consideration of the I-louse. The Bill then passed through the Committee, and was re ported without Amendment. OFFICES IN REVERSION. The Earl GROSVENOR adverted toa motion be had lately made, for an Account of Offices granted in Reversion, and ob served', that it had not been laid before the House ; a delay which he understood to have at isen from the circumstance o f' their not having been enrolled, and application had in con,e quence been made to the Treasury. The Earl of LIVERPOOL maintained that the Treasury had nothing to do with it; and that it rested with the House to cause its own Orders to be obeyed, on discovering the proper pee son to make the Return. A conversation of some length ensued. . . _ The LORD CHANCELLO - lit suggested, that as a return of a Simi? ar description was made three or four years'ago, it rnizlit be discovered from that who was the proper Officer to mike the rerun) note called for. ' Lord BOLLAND moved, that the paper he forthwith laid before the House, liut afterwards withdrew his ir,otion upon an understanding that it would be first advisable to discover who was the proper Officer that was to make the return. COMPLAINTS' OF ARBITRARY IMPRISONMErg. Lord HOLLAND, before the Order of the Day, was de sirous of pre:enting to the Honse two Petitions, front complaining' of harsh usage, unjust imprisonment, and in urr►v respects cruel treatment. They had been put into his hands ahove two hours preciously, and though► by had read Limn, he had not had sufficient time to make him self toaster of their contents. They were. however, very humbly entitled, and respectfully worded. One of them was from a person► of the nom►. of Knight, of whom he had never before heard, and the other from a person of the. name of Mitchell, to whose character vague (perhaps untounded) report had attached suspicionq, but lie begged to protest against the doctrine that objections against the moral charac ters of individuals were to operate against the • prriheiples. which they sought to maintain. It was true that persons ►n the sitivat of the Petitioners might endeavour to put their own Cases to the most favourable - point of view, by mtg.- gerating the hardships they had endured, and suppressing what made avrinst them ; but it should be at the sante tints rveollected, that there were other persons aecused of high misdemeanours whose statements were on that-acdount ree,i ved with great indulgence, and he only claimed the same indulgence for the 'etiti , ►ners. Ills Lordship then presented a petition front Jelme Knight. of Manchester, and Joseph Mitchell; of Pverpool, the latter of whom states his having introduced Oliver, at the riquFst of the latter, into stone meetings of the Iteformers•(similar petitions from liotb those individuals were recently. presented to th e //wise of Commons, and the, subitunce of them stated in our f' n rliaoi;ntnry.ftrports). With respect to the petition froni Mitchell, Lord Holland stated, that several.of the state- Torsos In it c4utd he verified sy persons - of • respectability. The petitions were read and ordered to lie upon the table. RECENT SUSPENSION orTHE HABEAS CORPUS.diCT. The Order npon which their Lordships• were sot-minified heiog read, Tile Earl of CARNARVON rose.--:When he had oti g in.lly presented tit* Petition of Drummond to the Hflose, he said he Could not conceive that the least ditErence of opinion could exist as to the propriety of referring it to the consideration of their Lordships' ;Secret Committee ; hot be had, ag,revably to the wish of . his Majesty's Ministers, postponed a motion to that effect to this day, in order that they might he the better prepared to meet. the :question. A resistance to such a um tiou HS he meant to offer must, be thowzlit, be highly,injurious to the chat acteis of Ministers themselves He called for no new proce«ling ; no uew Committee; and it was imperiously the duty of the House to cause itiquiry into the circumstances, with a view to ascertain whether the nature of the Petition was such HS to reTtire that which it went humbly to pray for, The course in the present in stance was of an easier and a clearer nature ; a ComMittee of Inquiry had already been appointed at the sug gest inn of Ministers themselves. .They had state, that out of their own bag that should be brought to light which would shew the whole conducrof his Majesty's Government, in the ex ercise of the extraordinary powers entrusted to them in the late Session of Parliament, and a full view of the- state of the Country subsequent to the last geport. It would he too much to assume that it was already decided-upon,. or that the in vestigation could he complete, going on such li mited. documents as Ministers merely thought pro per to lay before the Committee. The mere can vassing of such documents could never be a mode of eliciting truth. He meant not to suggest that thekmduct of Ministers would, on investigation, be (Mind faulty; but certainly if they wished to appear ,justified before the House and the Country, they moktAnn depend alone on such an inquiry as 'they Ittatisc;res had chalked out, or upon the ver dict of a It Nina; packed and nominated by them selves. It could never be expected that Minis ters would select from their own offices that which would criminate themselves. Two days had scarcely elapsed before they thought it neces sary lo produce another green hag. That proce dure shetved, that in their own opinions, the in formation originally afforded was not sufficient.— May not the House then fairly suppose, that not only in, but out of the Ministerial offices, fit mat ter fur inquiry may be produced? Much, how ever, of the importance of the •pentlit ' or inquiry would be calculated from the object Ministers had in view. They were asked, early in the Session, what their object was. This, at the time, they professed not to be able to state, alleg ing, it would deOend upon what the result of the inquiry may turn out to be. But lie would ven ture to state their object was, that an inquiry should lead to a Bill of indemnity. Let not the people of the country have reason even to itua gine that no justice was to be afforded to them, either at the hands of Parliament, or through the inferi , ,r tribunals of justice. Let them not think that Ministers alone were protected, and the subjects not. If the Petition was refused to be referred, such a conclusion, he feared, would be drawn. Let then those documents he sent to the Committee, who, he doubted not, would con sider them as they deserved. In a decision of this peculiar importance, the character, the import ance, and estimation of that House in the eyes of the country were naturally involved. They should show their determination to decree strict justice, and, if necessary, upon the agents of Ministers themselves. The Report of the Committee of last Session plainly intimated, that a part at least of the disturbances last year was increased by the very agents employed by Government. May it oot therefore be inferred, that a larger portion of guilt may, on further investigation, be found at tributable to the conduct of these persons. Though the referring of these petitions would be an im s portant object, it would be a still snore important object to show what sort of an inquiry was going on. If the real object were to ascertain the state of the country, then such petitions ought to be referred as a matter of course. What must be the regarded situation even of Ministers them selves, if they refuse a proper inquiry before the Committee ? Must they not remain under the taint of insidious charges ? They should wish, therefore, to be tried before God acid their Coun try, and not in their own dark Chamber, by a Secrct Committee. They should attend not to the feelings of Ministers alone, hut consider what the general feelings of individuals throughout the country actually were. They all called with one voice for investigation. They should promote inquiry, and for the sake of their own characters equal justice should be'extended to Ministers and to the people. Upon these grounds he pressed upon their Lordships an acquiescence in his mo tion. Under all the circumstances, the reference of such petitions to such a Committee as that now sitting should be a matter of course, and be there fore would move—" That the humble petitions of Samuel Drummond, Joists Knight, and Joseph Mitchell be referred to the Committee of Seuresy." Ou the question, Viscount SIDMOUTH rose.—He began by ob serving, that upon the general grounds urged by the Noble Earl, all such• Petitions ought to be refet red to their Lordships' Committee of Secrecy for the purpose Of inquiry. The argument, such as it was, would amount to this—let any Petition, from any individual whatever, be the facts assert ed ever• so false—let the contents be ever so ca lumnious, ever so libelous, in the highest.de gree—let all such, taming froth persons so cir cumstanced, be entertained by the House, and snbsequently referred to the Committee, which should devote itself to the examination of docu ments so produced ! lie tiusted, however, the House would see the subject in a very different light, and never lend i:s sanction to one of the _mot exceptionable propositions ever advanced. — tie would defy the Noble Earl tO,prove in the whole histoty of Secret Committees a single instance in which such a proposition was ever agreed to. The very nature of a Secret Committee was in its effect adverse to such a procedure. It may be consonant to the proceedings of Parliament to refer such-petitions to a Select, but never . to a Se cret Committee. The Noble Earl dwelt much on the case of the petitioners. If Noble Lords had read the petition Ole meant that . of Mr. Drum mond) they would soon be satisfied, that withont much more information, it was not possible that any such cognizance should be taken of it as the Noble Earl required. Mr. Drimmiond had asserted certain facts respecting the Meeting held on the 10th of March, near Manchester.; and that the Meeting had conducted itself in a most decorous and proper manner. Of he real facts of this case, they all had fuel information long since through the public papers. The opinion of the Committee re specting the-transactions it, the neighbourhood of Manchester, on the 10th of March last, was well known. Mr. Drummond thought proper to state that on that day much disturbance was occasioned " by a riotous, not to say a drunken soldiery." The case, however, really was, that tor, sot•ne days previous the Magistrates were forewarned that . such a meeting was to be held, and that the ob- . - jeet of it was, that the persons sa Assembl e d should march in a body to the metropolis, .and to demand a complanee with their requisitions from the Representative of the 'Sovereign in -Peison.--- (Hear, hear !)—Warrants were accordingly ap..plied for against the persons most actively en gaged in preparation, and some of these were exe cuted two days before ; but the remaining leaders; utterly regardless of the loss of their colleagues,' still proceeded to assemble a meeting on. the 10th of March, and the Magistrates took the proper precautions to preserve the public peace. 'Fitey were justly appiehensive that-so large an assem blage was intended to be collected that day, that the civil power would be insufficient, and they applied for some military assistance. Mr. Drummond was- , one of those who they felt it their duty to issue war rants fur the apprehension of; .upwards -of twelve thousand persons were assembled, and of those. larger portion were prepared for. the wird and ► dangerous expedient of marching to the -metro polis, and individuals were sedulously haranguing the multitude in the most dangerous and must in flammatory language. The assistance of the mi litary was found absolutely necessary, and a con siderable number were arrested. The conduct, as well as the character of Sir John Byng, on this as well as on all other occasions, was faultless and unexceptionable, and the assistance of the military was afforded in the most regular and or derly manner. The accounts received from the Magistrates were of this kind, and directly at ca- riance with Mr. Drummond's assertions on that head. Not a single instance of wanton or impro• per conduct could with truth be charged upon the military. Mr. Drummond was one of those cont. mitred to the New Bailey. He was afterwardS ex amined by him (the Noble Secretary of State) and his Majesty's Law Officers, on the h'ith ; on that occasion lie was told not to reply to any questions that would criminate himself. Not a word of com plaint was uttered by Mr. Drummond; while under examination there was no intimidation whatever— he was desired to speak freely. Nor afterwards did lie learn, that either to the messengers or upon any examination did be (the Petitioner) ut ter a word of complaint as to his usage. He would therefore now ask the Noble Lords, whe ther they could say that all petitions of this sort were worthy of inquiry or examination ? Wi'h respect to the much-talked-of procedure of Indem nity, he would say that his Majesty's Government disclaimed . any Bill or Bills that would protect themselves, or persons acting tinder them, against the consequences of that which resulted from their own vigour or their prudence. What it was their !' duty to require, was merely against that which would go to disclose the sources from whence their information was derived. They wished that such may not be disclosed, with reference not but to the seen esois(i-nithylaiyntotfsGoltftio,tdiell country.: l i s b y i e 'e receiveot il , vaj a cl%s :l ol f j s r f :o i s t m t h i e c t e l c ) these s u e n ‘ l t v i r e::ti:u . e t t:- would p y e telt; to o t b h l e e Z o r o it Petitionsvas t' presented liesall . l etiplart. night able n b i l p e os t s o ibl t e h e t h t c ifo o oat t i i t s 1.e4 facts, lhoh To ,la3sac, his ; las i n e a s (osi c a e s. a d nu iikminno:as knowledge, were e r ee e : i tog e are r , i t I ! containedous perversion terly unfit to be included. With respect to the case of Knight, he knew that attempts were made to insinuate that Viking Magistrates were excluded from seeing State .Prisoners, but such insinuations, he must say, were unfounded arid in the instance of Reading Gaol in particular, it was most satisfactorily proved that suclr'tfcharge' was totally groundless. In regard to that of Mitchell, he would only observe, that the charge made against a person of the !mine Or - Oliarer, as the cause of his detentiOn; - was neceisarilyfalie, as the warrants for his apprehension were, signed before they had any knowle,dge . of Oliver ;, and that the apprehension of till's petilionie well - not under a warrant from the Secretary of State; but . from the Magistrates. As to any improper ageocY) through the medium of spies or informers, it was a question he was ready to meet.at any time, and. would stand the brunt of the severest ordeal that ever was devised. Of the person alluded to, their knowledge was accidental ; but in several parts of the country he was successful (so we nnderst nod the Noble Viscount) in procuring important in.; formation. With regard to much of what had been alleged, respecting hits, the facts occurred at periods when he was unknown to them ; but from the conduct cif his Majesty's Government' in pro. curing important intelligence, and properly fol lowing up such information, much mischief and outrage was certainly averted; and for no small part of thiS, their Lordships' own Reports could* he confidently referred to. He would detain their Lordshipi no longer than to say, that upon these grounds and convictions, be felt it his duty to op pose the Noble Earl's motion. The Earl GRObVENOR and Lord KING supported the motion. Earl BATHURST argiled forcibly against it. The Marquis of LANSDOWNB seemed of opinion that the Committee should be empowered to send for additional papers, if deemed necessary. Earl GROsVntioß spoke in explanation. The Earl of LtvattPoot.tuaintained that it Was .competent to the Secret Committee to report, if it saw occasion, that it had not sufficient grounds upon which to come to a satisfactory conclubion, nulto apply for farther inform a tio n; t h ere f ore he felt it would be premature to appoint a distinct Committee to consider the Petitions referred to, until that Committee stroll's! have made its report. —.,As to -the allusion made tri the Manner in which the Secret Committee had been formed, he should only say, that the mode of proceeding- objected to was in accordance with the invariable custom of both Houses of Parliament in all times. With re gard to animadversions upon the ballot, !tut! !Lv opinion that the Committee should rather be pro posed by separate nounuation, - he hoped Unit Lord ships trotdd recollect the usual practice, that whet/ any Member proposed the appointment of a Corn' mines, be himself proposed the names of those ot whom he wish e d such Committee to consist ' What then w a s the difference between t he one and the oth e r mo d e o f nom i na tion, except that by the ballot an y i nv idi ous dis c ussion upon names -was avoided ? gut, he would ask, whethe r in any . case of this na t ure , Ministers had ever declined to make s uc h a reconunendation in the appointment of a COmmittee, as mieht enable them to collect the views of the members of all parties, .with 1.,e; speet to th e grounds upon which they had acte d ' They had not, to he sure, proposed-that a Con," mittee of this description should consist sMe'Y of Members from the opposite side of House, nor • could such a proposition be re!': sonably expected. Ministers had in fact sought for a Committee formed frOM different parties, in order that the Report of such Committee should be enlightened by the informatiout N tias ie v L ie i) w r s d , s and exempted from the prejudices, of a ll P ar' ties.Tbe Noble Lords ou the other side were no doubt actuated by the most cooscien but I wbo b m elo c n o g u c h c i l t i o 'at t a te% l o v ludeeto were not as interested in the real weba rc i and as anxious for the constitutional freedom o, the country, as any of the Noble Lot ds tip"" the opposite Bench--- . (hear, hear ! front the Aliniste" risi betich.) I I • — ?.le petitioners to whom the mo; that lion referred complained, he observed, first, !!' i ti t those they were improperly arrested; and secondly, I:: Committee they were cruelly treafed—(" and also that they Any charge being matte against them, were held to bail upon their liheratiou formed that they would ever be brought to 11' 0 ., observed a Noble Lord on theOppositionn e " l ;' ) „„.. Now with regard to theanass of compl4intora"e%., tion as to cruel treatment which those petiti,osiCeoc“), ta i tied, any Biil of I ndento y would not fireclu.st. s: erss . petitioners from legal remedy against any Al'n„I; fiction Magistrates, or Jailers concerned in the tub of of such cruelty. He never knew, indeed , vea Bill of Indemnity which shut out the aggr' e t trom their right of redress under such cir for the Suspension or beintf,, ty stances. Why then should the Noble Lord oppt, site (Lord Grosvenor), Who had formerly vote so peculiarly tenacious in this instance, and fron t an apprehension truly_ that something rootlet tak e place now, such as had never been witnessed b e " of the Habeas Corpus Act, 7 1 fore ? The Noble Earl concluded with observinri; that in every view of the subject, as well oo I ,l _ ground of . principle as of practice, he thought I: • motion objectionable, and therefore he s hould el pose its adoption. Lord HOLLAND commenced by observing, 11';ii,C as he considered the subject then before 111 .` 03 Lordships a branch of the great question 0" was pending between Ministers and the Cu unt : l ; he could not leave the House without siel i " r ; u " his opinion on it. He begged their Lordsb•Pi: .would take particular notice of a c harge va g li j ' f f had been made against his Noble Frien d ( ; - , }l o Grosvernor), It had been said, that be known to have voted more th an once for the 5 ; - ; pension of the Habeas C or p us A c t, Thus Lott at any tim e su p porte d s uc h a measure as tise",,, an argument agi t t r w: opposingi' w casion. How liery•cauti,us ought the y an y be ti ; e(l an other how they countenanced the Suspc.ostanat any 1. 1- ,f when such countenance was held to be a disqua"' fication from opposing it on any subsequent oece hen e t C ‘ ‘s v v h i i e s t hs i c t elA n 'a s i b cis s e r ts i oieNtelirim:eoipblolgels:vilt:ealc^:trrieaeltnhslst Suspension trial: spse t -1)1s be 1 31 1 °i : d was rv Pt i f r i ein e s s : °ljois i it ib ic : e te eel l seen attacks made on the Constitution, but t :hat knew, and so must their Lordships knows l i t though persons arrested were not to be brota A , to trial' immediately, vet they had an und o "o r right to be put upon their Counts y, either tO n o o f their guilt or innocence proved. The teas ° , oo the delay was said to prevent other traitors t i l ise j eluding justice. Such had been the langnage poe when the Suspension was appiied fors bu t kw that. it was repealed, the)/ were told that con_ ce menu without trial was a necessary conseqn e , 1 ro of that Suspension, and instead of inquirin 1g.17.4$ the grievances stated to have Z.teen suffered by ( e typo , had -been confined, ;Ministers appoint. t cr Committee to have a Bill of ludemnity p.assed:,!, their cotithict. The Noble. Viscount (Sulinour statements to the allegations of the petition, iost‘1"01 leery prudently confined himself to making cooli e c li c of. opposing the arguments of his Noble 1 : ! , 4 ( (Lord Carnarvon.) Ail that had been 5 3 ' . : 30 Ministers was, that no inquiry should be . p ia into-the case of the petitioners, and that t:a 'livers) should be the ooly persons who If s', give evidence of their own conduct. ti t i mittee was appointed in the us ual yea)", sz would say that it was unjustly appnint" l ; s : , ( 1 as could not be justice to constitute, ihe judges in their own case. He though t ", Lew , certoo 3 00 s:en precept of our law, " Audi aVeram!'r,vo„o ought to be attended to, It • eeding be a more regular mode of In" bee t the lame and crippled system "'bid' l ' l ,, (l r a followed. If Ministers had come f0re . .. 1 the f acknowledged their error, if tl'eY said the had abused th e . power entrusted !" ' O l he would have thought it more consi eert ' L o l4 l manly than their present conduct, and ,I,,„ce would then oppose a Bill of lademoity , have given them credit for their candoe,)e cot r was the time to institute an iuquiry duct of Ministers, to throw open thei r jostb, the reception o f a ll com pl a i n t s which tv ere te e: made, us he did not know it happened, ho t 3 f a ir!, loot gone abroad that the country was , ( 00 C dealt with by Gov ernmen t, an d he rt•AllY 0)0 there was prima facie esideoce of the fa "t+ f t i ie h his Majesty's Ministers were at least gu ilty be er' onisdemeanottr. Notwithstanding tt hoc lltc said of' Oliver, he was still of opinii,o, tir o (Oliver) bad occasioned much 1 "_01C country. He would ►pledge himself to prose r:/ itio a House, that Oliver had been guilty of el' L , 1 . 0 !1 1 much disturbance. lie would quote a passagc , : e o f history to prove the e‘ i! restd!iii4 hod' t l ' e ,.l 3 ci' spies by Government. H e ; 1, 0 ,„1,1 not gaol' rti o tot , : nor Falkland,but •would real a tn4-"g : e Hume ; it related to the conduct of : %1 : 11 ‘ ;„,,t in 1584, it was nt.; , tll,- - ns bof this !lute Burley and Waisingbarn we re _ O l in employing spies and informers, 1 114 . si l 7'l er th thl tt:; 4 4 * vte, tt P 7,1 64'444 ,tk, I ff 1 ; 1 4 Net b W ith L ehi vLetti t ild t 11 4 :: It l er 1 14 4 vi tat f,Oll tr Pi t ! .44,1 i t... '` • II tr :Rt t :oti 411 1144 tlly, .for ' 41 141 •i4tvi that n tXti th e o Pi]